When you sit down in the chair for a polygraph exam, several tubes and wires are connected to your body in specific locations to monitor your physiological activities. Deceptive behavior triggers certain physiological changes that can be detected by a polygraph and a trained examiner This examiner is looking for the amount of fluctuation in certain physiological activities.

Here’s a list of physiological activities that are monitored by the polygraph and how they are monitored:   Respiratory rate – Two pneumographs, rubber tubes filled with air, are placed around the test subject’s chest and abdomen. When the chest or abdominal muscles expand, the air inside the tubes is displaced. In an analog polygraph, the displaced air acts on a bellows, an accordion-like device that contracts when the tubes expand. This bellows is attached to a mechanical arm, which is connected to an ink-filled pen that makes marks on the scrolling paper when the subject takes a breath. A digital polygraph also uses the pneumographs, but employs transducers to convert the energy of the displaced air into electronic signals.   Blood pressure/heart rate – A blood-pressure cuff is placed around the subject’s upper arm.

Tubing runs from the cuff to the polygraph. As blood pumps through the arm it makes sound; the changes in pressure caused by the sound displace the air in the tubes, which are connected to a bellows, which moves the pen. Again, in digital polygraphs, these signals are converted into electrical signals by transducers.   Galvanic skin resistance (GSR) – This is also called electro-dermal activity, and is basically a measure of the sweat on your fingertips. The finger tips are one of the most porous areas on the body and so are a good place to look for sweat.

We sweat more when we are placed under stress. Fingerplates, called galvanometers, are attached to two of the subject’s fingers. These plates measure the skin’s ability to conduct electricity. When the skin is hydrated (as with sweat), it conducts electricity much more easily than when it is dry.   Some polygraphs also record arm, leg and other physical movements. As the examiner asks questions, signals from the sensors connected to your body are recorded on a single strip of moving paper.

When you sit down in the chair for a polygraph exam, several tubes and wires are connected to your body in specific locations to monitor your physiological activities. Deceptive behavior triggers certain physiological changes that can be detected by a polygraph and a trained examiner This examiner is looking for the amount of fluctuation in certain physiological activities.

Here’s a list of physiological activities that are monitored by the polygraph and how they are monitored:   Respiratory rate – Two pneumographs, rubber tubes filled with air, are placed around the test subject’s chest and abdomen. When the chest or abdominal muscles expand, the air inside the tubes is displaced. In an analog polygraph, the displaced air acts on a bellows, an accordion-like device that contracts when the tubes expand. This bellows is attached to a mechanical arm, which is connected to an ink-filled pen that makes marks on the scrolling paper when the subject takes a breath. A digital polygraph also uses the pneumographs, but employs transducers to convert the energy of the displaced air into electronic signals.   Blood pressure/heart rate – A blood-pressure cuff is placed around the subject’s upper arm.

Tubing runs from the cuff to the polygraph. As blood pumps through the arm it makes sound; the changes in pressure caused by the sound displace the air in the tubes, which are connected to a bellows, which moves the pen. Again, in digital polygraphs, these signals are converted into electrical signals by transducers.   Galvanic skin resistance (GSR) – This is also called electro-dermal activity, and is basically a measure of the sweat on your fingertips. The finger tips are one of the most porous areas on the body and so are a good place to look for sweat.

We sweat more when we are placed under stress. Fingerplates, called galvanometers, are attached to two of the subject’s fingers. These plates measure the skin’s ability to conduct electricity. When the skin is hydrated (as with sweat), it conducts electricity much more easily than when it is dry.   Some polygraphs also record arm, leg and other physical movements. As the examiner asks questions, signals from the sensors connected to your body are recorded on a single strip of moving paper.

There are only two people in the room during a polygraph exam — the person conducting the exam and the subject being tested. Other people in the room during a test could greatly influence the results of the exam.

My role as a polygraph examiner is that of a seeker of truth. I’m looking for the truth. I am totally unbiased and neutral when a person walks in. As soon as I make an assessment that there’s no deception indicated, I immediately become that person’s advocate.

The polygraph examiner has several tasks in performing a polygraph exam:

• Setting up the polygraph and preparing the subject being tested
• Asking questions
• Profiling the test subject
• Analysing and evaluating test data

How the question is presented can greatly affect the results of a polygraph exam. There are several variables that a polygraph examiner has to take into consideration, such as cultural and religious beliefs. Some topics may, by their mere mention, cause a specific reaction in the test subject that could be misconstrued as deceptive behavior. The design of the question affects the way the person processes the information and how he or she responds.

Kapensi vs Premier Foods (LC)

Amalamated Pharmaceuticals LTD vs Grobler NO and Others (LC)

Malhangu vs CIM Deltak 1986/7/ILJ346

Gallant Vs CIM Deltak

1. Shinga vs Gilbeys Distillers & Vintners (Pty) Limited, case no. NHN 11/2/10237 Industrial Court of South Africa

Magnum Shield Security vs Commisioner: Dale Ntsoane N.O (1st Respondent) Commission for Consiliation Mediation and Arbitration (2nd Respondent) Pailos Moatshe (3rd Respondent) Case No: JR2799/04 (September 2006) (LC)

1. Truworths Limited vs Commission for Conciliation and Arbitration (1st Respondent) Khabo Mamba N.O (2nd Respondent) Rawu obo Adeline Masilela (3rd Respondent) Case No: JR789-07 (1 August 2008) (LC)
2. Harmse vs Rainbow Farms, case no. WE 1728 of 9 July 1997  CCMA
3. Govender vs Cargo and Container Services, case no KN 4881  CCMA
4. Singh vs SBV Service Limited, case no KN 35440 (18 April 2000)  Commissioner C J Munks CCMA
5. Mr J M Qabalatsane vs Fidelity Cash Management, case no NW 14877 CCMA  held at Klerksdorp  5 July 2000
6. Zulu vs Morkels Stores (Pty) Ltd, case no KN 41022 (22 September 2000) Commissioner G. Jenkin  CCMA
7. NECAWU vs Security Self Help, case no MP 10918. CCMA
8. Bronwin Louisa Groenewald vs Nedbank case no, WE 22300 (31 January 2000) CCMA
9. PETUSA vs National Trading Co, case no WE 15191 (3 April 2000) CCMA
10. SASU obo D Mashele vs Security Self Help Case No: MP14591 (7 April 2000) CCMA
11. Vivian Majola & one other vs Ulundi Cash & Carry  KN 48471 (13 August 2001) Commissioner Charles Anthony Oakes. CCMA
12. Govindamah Pillay vs CCW Catering, case no KN 49880 (1 November 2001) Commissioner M I Madondo CCMA
13. Avesh Sewran vs Standard Bank South Africa Case No: KN5193-01 (1 February 2002) Commissioner Leigh-Anne Dayal. CCMA
14. FAWU obo Manatha (Mandlenkosi O) Michael Masondo (Union / Applicant) vs Pyramid Catering Supplier Case No: KN12996-01 (16 May 2002) Commissioner Karen Charles. CCMA
15. CEPPWAWU obo Maliboho vs New United Pharmaceutical Distributors (PTY) Ltd Case No: GA14206-01 (26 September 2002) Commissioner Victoria van Rooyen CCMA
16. SACCAWU vs The Cellars Hohenhort Hotel case no, WE 4118-02 ( 8 October 2002) CCMA
17. NUMSA vs McCarthyMotor Holdings case no, WCU 76/02 (14 November 2002) CCMA
18. NUMSA vs Shelco Shelving case no, WE 9841-02 (12 March 2003) Commissioner Vicky Smith CCMA
19. NUMSA vs Lowveld Implement & Farm Equipment MP 2092-02 (17 June 2003) Commissioner Raymond Dibden CCMA
20. Sadhasivan Naidu vs Antalis (Pty) Ltd case no, KN 18023-03 (3 December 2003) Commissioner M M Govender.
21. Gajadhou Sukdeo vs NBL Bakers Biscuits Division KNDB664-04 (16 August 2004) Commissioner Wayne Paul CCMA
22. Petros N Mzimela vs United National Breweries SA (PTY) Ltd Case No: KNDB8571-04 (23 May 2005) Commissioner: Richard Lyster CCMA
23. SACCAEU obo Mokalapa S vs Truworths Case No: GAPT 549-06 (18 November 2006) Commissioner: Braam van Wyk CCMA
24. James N Njiyela vs Sasko Baking Case No: KNDB10386-07 (29 October 2008) CCMA